On August 28, OpenSea CEO Devin Finzer revealed that the leading NFT marketplace had received a Wells notice from the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC). This formal warning suggests that the SEC believes some non-fungible tokens (NFTs) on OpenSea’s platform might be classified as securities. This move by the SEC has sparked debate, with some legal professionals questioning the agency’s priorities.
Can NFTs Be Classified As Securities?
Oscar Franklin Tan, the Chief Legal Officer of Web3 organization Atlas Development, weighed in on the issue during a recent interview with Cointelegraph. Tan acknowledged that in specific scenarios, NFTs could indeed be classified as securities. He explained that certain NFTs, particularly those tied to investment-like structures, might resemble traditional securities. However, he emphasized that such classifications should be narrowly defined and applied to specific cases.
Tan warned that broad or vague regulatory actions could stifle innovation within the NFT space. “If not carefully tailored, such actions could scare away content creators and hamper experimentation with this emerging technology,” Tan stated. He argued that the SEC’s approach should focus on providing clear guidelines rather than issuing broad warnings that could create uncertainty.
The Problem with the SEC’s Wells Notice
Tan was critical of the SEC’s decision to issue a Wells notice to OpenSea, suggesting that it does little to advance the understanding of how NFTs should be regulated. He argued that these notices only serve to initiate “guessing games,” leaving the industry without clear rules to follow.
“They do everything but give us clear rules to follow. They are not productive at all. And the people hurt most are those who want to follow the rules and build communities in a proper way,” Tan remarked.
He highlighted the broad and varied uses of NFTs, which range from digital collectibles to certificates and even simple digital assets like a selfie minted as an NFT. Regulating NFTs, he suggested, is akin to trying to regulate the internet — a vast and multifaceted space that requires specific and targeted rules.
The uncertainty surrounding the legal status of NFTs has left many artists and creators in a precarious position. Tan pointed out that the vague regulatory landscape could dissuade artists from utilizing NFTs as a medium for their work. He cited an example where if he were to mint a selfie as an NFT and offer it to others, he should have the freedom to do so without fear of regulatory repercussions.
“If a regulator thinks certain NFTs are problematic, they should be clear and not scare people from trading my selfie NFT,” he said.
The Broader Implications
The SEC’s recent actions have prompted some within the NFT community to push back. On July 30, attorneys representing NFT creator Jonathan Mann and filmmaker Brian Frye filed a lawsuit against the SEC, seeking clarification on what specific activities could trigger securities laws in the context of NFTs.
Also Read: OpenSea vs. SEC: OpenSea Gets ‘Wells Notice’ From SEC Over Securities Claims”
As the debate continues, the NFT community remains in limbo, awaiting clearer guidance from regulators. Tan’s insights suggest that while certain NFTs might warrant regulation, the SEC’s current approach could do more harm than good, potentially stifling innovation and creativity in the rapidly evolving world of Web3.
In conclusion, the SEC’s scrutiny of NFTs highlights the complex and evolving nature of this new technology. As regulators and the industry navigate these uncharted waters, the need for clear and precise guidelines becomes increasingly evident.
Disclaimer: The information in this article is for general purposes only and does not constitute financial advice. The author’s views are personal and may not reflect the views of Chain Affairs. Before making any investment decisions, you should always conduct your own research. Chain Affairs is not responsible for any financial losses.
About The Author
